As a first principle of Thelemic Philosophy, “Love Under Will” is both rich, and philosophically deep in its meanings. With multiple levels of interpretation, this phrase is one of our core “Memetic Anchors” which drives Thelemic culture.

People with little experience or knowledge of this phrase are often very curious about the relationship of Love and Will in terms of people's own intimate dynamics. In our own relationships we often interact with individuals who want to know how this translates into the relational interactivity of Intimate Love.

I am curious how other people who claim themselves as Thelemites have found this philosophy to fit, or guide their own experience of intimate love andcaring in all facets of human relationships.

This seems to me to be the the most important, ways other individuals come to know and experience the fruits of Thelema in their lives.

Like all religious texts, The Book of the Law offers numerous possibilities for interpretation. Thelema speaks to the idiosyncrasies of the individual. Yet, in one's own relationships when theory meets the dynamic ground of praxis, these ideas must bear fruit in some form.

The key question: how does “Love Under Will” translate into friendships, relations with family members, and intimate lovers?

For all of the metaphysical and theological complexity, how does philosphical rubber meet the road in the daily application of this philosophy to those whom you care about?

I'm impressed by how difficult a subject this is to write about. All I can say at the moment is that my experience of Love under Will so far is quite delicate, and not well suited for putting into words. I think about it; it's gone.

Hopefully, others will do better than I can. This is such an important subject, and so rarely brought up.

The rubber hits the road in yobbo burnouts, mostly, in my experience; screeching tyres at three a.m. and tinnies tossed in the tyre-tracks. That is, almost invariably, interpretation is taken lightly as a matter of self-indulgent personal preference with very little intellectual, or any other, discipline. While there might be a view that that is the nature of love in its non-infinite expression, and the best a mortal can do is to accept the discipline of that demon by the infinite will, the plain fact regarding interpretation of the principles of study and discussion of the Book of the Law is that they are circumvented by the injunctions of The Comment. To invite discussion without acknowledging this, especially with those “with little experience or knowledge of this phrase” is disingenuous in the extreme. If you respect one of the texts, why don't you respect all of them?
I am open to various interpretations of The Comment, even to some quite flexible ones, but generally it is just ignored or defied outright. I, personally, believe that there is much wisdom, just as it seems to indicate, in simply not talking about the contents of the Book of the Law. (Xnoubis' instincts might be right for once.) I go so far as to discuss The Comment itself, and the statements of Law in The Comment, and one comment on the general interpretation I'd like to make is that the self-indulgent interpretation of “Love is the law, love under will.” is in practice abetted by a simply ignorant (though astoundingly pervasive) interpretation of the companion statement “Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.” One of the key differences is that unlike “Love is the law, love under will.” it is not unequivocally present tense. Yet it is routinely read as if it is; leaving the option, whenever there appears to be a conflict between the two statements of law/Law, to blithely disregard love-under-will in favour of “I'll do donuts up and down whatever street I bloody-well feel like, whenever I feel like it, and cackle inanely at anyone who objects.” (And, no, this wasn't intended as a comment on U.S. foreign policy.)
The key word here is “shall”. This can be read as future tense; so it can be read, as it applies to oneself, as the Law as it will apply in some future state of initiation. Alternatively, it might be read as the Law as it might apply generally in the world in a future aeon. However, “shall” may also be read in the present tense, in what is called the “strong” sense, as an assertion. So, while it can be read in the present, one is then placed, by reading it in present-tense agreement, in the position of being a co-assertionist with A-f-n-k, engaged in a work of constant assertion of that Law. One might well ask oneself if one is really up to that, and if one really wants the responsibility and the burden of that.
Whatever, the plain fact is that “Love is the law, love under will.” is unequivocally present tense; and any interpretation of the Law as a whole must, one would think, come to terms with this essential feature of the statement. It does not say “Thou shalt love (under will)” much less “Thou shalt love all (under will). It refers to love under will, whatever that is, as it exists in the present.

How about the interpretation that our notions of Love must be second to the Work of the Will; love under will. Until we have discovered our purpose, and are actively engaged in it's fulfillment, Love is a secondary pursuit. It is hard to truly love until one has cleared away much of the psychological baggage that twists and perverts love. How can we truly be intimate with another individual until we are truly intimate with ourselves? Love Under Will? Respect and concern for those we encounter, but never at the expense of the individual. When two people of similar disposition pair-bond…watch the magick.

|Re: Love Under Will: Practice and Theory\\
by Mark Shekoyan on Tuesday July 31, @03:36PM
|

I agree. In my own life I have several times chosen to “follow my bliss” at key relational moments. At the time it seemed selfish, but as I look back I was following the orbit of my star. You cannot be true to another person if you have not been true to yourself first, and any relationship is only as rich as the integrity and experience of the individuals involved.\\
\\
This goes against alot of the propanganda we recieve in the media however. People often “give themselves up” in a mockery of Love. Codependence is the norm in our relational role models.\\
\\
How rare the coupling of fully individuated persons who have followed their hearts course, and who the universe brings together at the right moment to share the mystery.\\
\\
Yes, that is the most profound form of magick.\\
\\

|Re: Love Under Will: Practice and Theory\\
by Mark Shekoyan on Tuesday July 31, @03:36PM
|

I agree. In my own life I have several times chosen to “follow my bliss” at key relational moments. At the time it seemed selfish, but as I look back I was following the orbit of my star. You cannot be true to another person if you have not been true to yourself first, and any relationship is only as rich as the integrity and experience of the individuals involved.\\
\\
This goes against alot of the propanganda we recieve in the media however. People often “give themselves up” in a mockery of Love. Codependence is the norm in our relational role models.\\
\\
How rare the coupling of fully individuated persons who have followed their hearts course, and who the universe brings together at the right moment to share the mystery.\\
\\
Yes, that is the most profound form of magick.\\
\\

You are missing the point. The primary clause is still “Love is the law” and while it might be hard to “truly” love, for love to be a real and operative law in the present, it must be something which is working, or can work at least, on people as they are. It seems to me that it is all too easy to love, in the ordinary way, and that that mode of operation has swept the world; as opposed to the way the world did work until very recently, and still does work in many parts of the world. There is still real opposition in such places as India; where they call marriages based on love “love matches”, as opposed to arranged marriages. Good Hindus think love matches immoral, and arranged marriages are still thought the good and proper way. However, as the old ways break down, matriarchs wishing to persevere with the traditional mode of matching now run the risk of a fate similar to that of the recently-deceased Queen of Nepal.\\
I think that some confusion has arisen in the interpretation of love-under-will because the alternative is already being forgotten in cultures where love is already accepted as the natural law; and it is easy to just over-read the basic idea.\\
Of more interest to me is the definition of the “will”. It is by no means clear whose will that refers to, but one would imagine that it is that of Cupid/Eros whose caprices link people togethor with the bonds of love, his arrows being that will. For the vast majority of people this is a process over which they have no personal control. That fulfils at least one of the definitional requirements of “law”.\\
\\

Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law.
To direct ones will into the world from a place of love{non-sentimental}based reality as opposed to a fear{lack & limitation}based reality?
Love IS the Law,Love under Will.

|Re: Love Under Will: Practice and Theory\\
by Elvis Flushley on Saturday August 04, @11:24AM
|

Yours is the most logical assertion made so far, and bears some light. The reparation of the opposite of Love as Fear gets us set on the right path to absolving the abstract into the situational and the particular. A thing must be compared to it's opposite in order to be understood of itself. This is before we even get to consider operating systems (ethics? shhh…trying to improve our public image).\\
Love can equal Fear in many instances, as pain can be pleasure…these great cataclysms of our own affairs are paroxysms of pleasure for Nuit in her rapture. But many seek “pure” Love, that lasting bond with another, a soul-mate scenario, with whatever accoutrements their little heart desires, a world in which all is joy and peace, and we all look like we're on TV. This reality, can of course, be orchestrated.\\
But the particulars are just that: the devil is in the details, that's where the magic(why not use common parlance, who the hell do I think I am, anyway?) happens. In tandem to this train of thought, the it is important to remember we live and die every moment, and God and the Devil can change places at every turn. This is where Love and Fear interact. At all stages of the sex game, there is tension, and there is relaxation, which are the biological equivalent to love and fear.\\
Of course the trap to this whole construction is that Love and Fear are not polar opposites. Fear is a biological response. It is the reaction of the animal mind to many situations that a human will hurtle itself into. Love is an ideal, an operation of higher intricacies of nerves, the result in fact, of a process of cyclic secretions which must mix just right and be introduced to another set of neurons that have been conditioned in the complimentary manner. Love is beyond the conscious mind in many ways, as many variables are necessary to calculate the plotted path of one's individual Love as there are sciences, pseudosciences, mysticism, and mental sytems combined. Fear is actually quite useful and enjoyable, if administered in the proper doses. Who doesn't enjoy watching a raunchy horror flick, or riding a rocket-coaster? For the feint of heart, you may wish to exit the theater. This is a fun topic, but I digress. One more thing though, lack and limitation are as much of an illusion as their polar opposites bounty and boundlessness. And why avoid the sentimental connotations of Love? Sentiment is what makes Love between humans work. And if Law is not a means to govern the interactions of individuals as they are integrated into the whole as a unit, then I don't know what.\\
The opposite of Love, then, is Hate. Some will argue that Hate is fear on steroids, like Yoda, and that if you rid yourself of fear you will not hate. But hate is an energy reserved for certain occasions which may come up, wherever particular people congregate, that must be dealt with on a practical level. It is part of the experience of Life. Thrust and enjoy, damn you! Hate is not included in the mysteries of the “as brothers fight ye!” line. It's not a competitive energy, not in a sportly sense. A slip-shod analogy, hate is to killing as love is to sex. They are associated, but not always present in the act. And when does hate express itself as sex and love as murder?\\
Now we see the twisting form of the dragon: love begets sex begets hate begets death and all forms of transmutations. But in light of the overarching consciousness, though they be catastophic events to us, they are the sensations of raptuous love in the body of the Universe. what's the French for 'little death?' You know what I'm talking about…\\
Here we get to scenes of frustration, anger, jealousy, scenes of carnality, scenes of players and pimps and prosties, scenes of marriage and elderly couples and children playing, smiling faces at picnics… All of it bound together, all of it with sex and death woven into rites of passage, binding us all together as we proceed…ever unto further motion.\\
Symbolically, to sum up. Love=Law (the force of authority, the code of action, the modus operandi) = The Sword –here we stop to consider the qualities of Libra and the trump Adjustment– = an instrument operated by the Hand, which gets us into the YHVH engine, or whatever covenant a person holds in a fourfold manner that can be expanded and contracted to suit operations. This is of course where Love is operated by the will, which is responsible for the longview.\\
The longview is available by reading upon pertinent topics, guided by the right mind. and the right mind bone is connected to the right action bone, and the right action bone is connected to the right speech bone…93/93\\
\\

|Re: Love Under Will: Practice and Theory\\
by <Nekial> on Thursday August 02, @05:18PM
|

93\\
\\
This, of the comments here, is closest to my perceptoin. I read it like this:\\
Do what thou wilt = [natural] law\\
Love is the law; Love = [natural] law\\
\\
Your true will = love = law.\\
\\
In personal relationships this reminds me not to do things like a dog, panting and wagging for that pat on the head. One must do/make out of one's own will -\\
and not out of lust for result.\\
\\
Be genuine. We have a tendency to lie our asses off for a date. This will not bring happiness…\\
Pure honesty throughout will bear most surprising fruits. [In my experience.]\\
\\
93 93/93\\
~N\\
\\

…24 years ago i met my mate ; Meryl we bonded immeadiatly, i was 27 she was 22, two years later
we went to Berkeley and joined OTO, a year later we started doing Gnostic Mass in the grand lodge,
we performed this for about two years off and on,
this only strengthened our bond, even though people tried to come between us, our magickal experiance has always been a two way conduit between us, we were
never rich, as we were of the bohemian nature, but
everything we have passed through together has always strengethened our bond of love…

we still continue to grow…together…Thelema
was, and has been a very important factor in our
relationship, however we only feel that we are continuing something we began in other lifetimes…

i never got a formal education, to speak of and in the circumstances of my life, i feel that; in this life, a formal education would only have been an obsticle, a way to conduct me into society, so that i might conform, if i am anything i am a nonconformist, i joined OTO, because i was a poet,
and Crowley was also a poet, remember the lion in the lust card, 'head of a poet'…so for me my experiance of thelema has always been of a bohemian nature, i did not join OTO to learn how to be a conformist, rather i joined because i wanted to channel energy, in order to evolve as a person and a poet, i do not suffer idiots gladly,
hey, neither did Crowley, although his experiance was of a magnitude orders above mine, at some point the nexus of his teaching crossed my point of departure…and there was mesh!…it does not matter really to me in the final analysis that i
was cought up in a power struggel in OTO in the few brief years that i was in grand lodge, what matters is that Meryl and i got what we came for,
a strengthening experiance that is indellibly stamped on our third eyes…the only reason i come on here is because i feel that i am carring on something i started years ago, i do not care a fig about what anybody wants to dump on me, i know what i experianced, i know who i am, and i know where i am going…if someone wants to come on a “thelemic forum” and boast about how great they are BECAUSE! of thier education, fine!…what is that to me?…i am only interested in poetic vision, and to the extent that that component is still functioning within the core of thelema, then
we have a meeting of minds, if you want to tell me how much you understand the intracate mechanisms
of various quantum systems or neo-aeonic systems
or other social stratems, i say ya i will take a look, but i do not feel gnosis of the word of the aeon, or Tao or Logos, is necessarily contingent upon a working knowledge of vast intellectual subsystems…just me! sorry if i can't book a room at Aspin and discuss the CEO of OTO over cognac, maybe next lifetime, but you never know..Hmmmmmm!!! …93 always…

Re: Love Under Will: Practice and Theory\\
by Fra THA;M on Wednesday August 01, @11:40AM\\

Re: Love Under Will: Practice and Theory\\
by <Azag> on Thursday August 16, @01:10AM

my first shelling, how cute.\\
remniscent of my first speeding ticket, scary but exciting\\
I feel somehow….deflowered.\\
and i dint even curse. sniff-sniff.\\
\\
I just have to mellow out if I want it up front. Lesson learned.\\
\\
I will again respectfully digress into the woods of my own inexperience as I am but a simple cave man trying to interpret other peoples cave paintings, evidentally with little success.\\
\\
Peace\\
\\

Re: Love Under Will: Practice and Theory\\
by <Parlertriks> on Thursday August 16, @09:02AM\\

Re: Love Under Will: Practice and Theory\\
by Fra THA;M on Thursday August 16, @03:58PM

“I've always noticed the supra-educated among us tend to remain silent, for fear of suffering fools”\\
\\
And you are whining about my ego-centricity? Ha Ha. I have never once derided anyone based on their level of education, only their degree of boohooing and bellyaching…I have never once judged myself someone's better based on my education. I've never even mentioned what it is. Hell, I admit that I am nothing. Absolutely nothing. A lone individual in a godless universe. Most likely I will accomplish nothing earth-shattering in my life, and I can prognosticate with some certainty that I will solve none of the puzzles of existence.\\
\\
Because I am nothing, it fills me with profound amusement that the words of this lone individual can have such an impact that sometimes the wimps come out and start bawling big crocodile tears at my words. I guess that some people (a generalization, no finger pointing) are such sniveling slaves that they actually care about what others are saying, instead of walking with their heads held high, confident in who they are. Do what thou wilt and say what thou wilt. I make no apologies.\\
\\
P.S If I do happen to run into you, down on your luck, holding a sign on the streetcorner, I will certainly buy you some lunch and shoot you some money to clean yourself up. Love.\\
\\

Re: Love Under Will: Practice and Theory\\
by <Parlertriks> on Thursday August 16, @04:39PM

“I can prognosticate with some certainty that I will solve none of the puzzles of existence.”\\
\\
except that you solved that one \\
\\

Re: Love Under Will: Practice and Theory\\
by <Azag> on Thursday August 16, @06:20PM

yeah thats profound.\\
I did like “you are whining” next to “only their degree of boohooing and bellyaching” - what do you think your projected version of humility is? Have you've gained something by asserting your vaunted selflessness? Again with the same BS you condemn…empty - reaching…I rest my evaporating point…\\
\\
If I see you on the street Ill probably say hi.\\
Take That!\\
Swoosh, zip, zip, zip -\\
(93 carved into back of sportcoat)\\}:]\\
\\

Re: Love Under Will: Practice and Theory\\
by Fra THA;M on Thursday August 16, @07:56PM

Ya Jazz\\
All those 'vast intellectual subsystems' thats\\
all well & good, nothing wrong with it & theres\\
a poetry to it as well,but I am totally with you\\
as to it not being,'necessarily contingent'.\\
Oh & how about I have my people call your people in that next incarnation & we`ll do lunch, what ya say man?\\
93 93/93\\
\\

Re: Love Under Will: Practice and Theory\\
by <woof> on Saturday August 04, @08:26PM

Re: Love Under Will: Practice and Theory\\
by Fra THA;M on Saturday August 04, @10:05PM

Why the continual eqating of Thelema with the OTO? It is but one manifestation of the 93 current (some would argue a questionable one), yet people seem to use Thelema and the OTO as synonyms which they aren't.\\
\\

The way i see it, is in regards to the whole basis of the Great Work, being the knowledge and understanding of one's True Self (Being)… this brings to mind a quote i recently heard (when i think of this in Light of Love under will.)

'Love is like magic, but sometimes magic is only an illusion.'

We often fool ourselves into believing we are in love.

On another end of the spectrum of love, we misinterpret or dont understand the notion behind [Liber Al, 2:59, 60]

and thus we embrace with an illusional love everything regardless of how it fits in your very own life, or how one benefits or is obsctructed by it.

Love must be under Will, or it may be that that love is only an illusion. Which brings to mind a whole other quote, from a song:

'You're fooling yourself with your cynical lies.'

If trying to find your True Self, why would you wish to fool yourself? If you wish to be and become your True Self, and be true to that self, why would you wish to fool anyone? Pride can never be found behind lies.

Crowley took the phrases “Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.” and “Love is the law, love under will.” out of their contexts in the first chapter of the Book of the Law to serve as salutations that would summarize his Prophetic message. It seems like an excellent choice of slogans to me, at least it certainly resonates with those who now follow Thelema (would the movement have become any different if he had chosen “Every man and every woman is a star.” and “There is no law beyond Do what thou wilt.” instead?). But there are also some drawbacks to taking things out of context, especially the opportunities it provides for misunderstanding. Take the line from verse II:21, “Compassion is the vice of kings”. It's often taken by the squeamish to mean that one proves oneself a king by indulging in this vice of Compassion. That might be a bit harder for them to do if they quoted it in context, “We have nothing with the outcast and the unfit: let them die in their misery. For they feel not. Compassion is the vice of kings: stamp down the wretched & the weak: this is the law of the strong: this is our law and the joy of the world.” I guess one can turn 'stamping down the wretched & the weak' into a metaphor for charity if it's truly desired, but most people probably don't.

“Love is the law, love under will.” is very often understood to be saying that love must be subordinate to will, but another way of understanding it is that love is beneath, deeper than will. And after all isn't love, in practice, the way you find your will? The “is” to your will's “shall be”. It's like that golden thread in Liber Tzaddi “wherewith I guide you to the heart of the groves of Eleusis”. Furthermore, the first part of the lesson in verse I:57 is much more complex than just a comparison of love and will. It's also about the nature of love and the proper worship of Nuit. “Invoke me under my stars! Love is the law, love under will. Nor let the fools mistake love; for there are love and love. There is the dove, and there is the serpent.” I have written of doves and serpents elsewhere. As for invoking Nuit “under her stars”, I suppose it could mean outdoors at night. But if “Every man and every woman is a star.” it could also mean to invoke Nuit in the guise of the human beings all around us. Just a thought.

Re: Love Under Will: Practice and Theory\\
by <Will> on Sunday August 05, @09:55PM

Love is the law, love under will.” is very often understood to be saying that love must be subordinate to will, but another way of understanding it is that love is beneath, deeper than will.\\
\\
Looking at Dictionary.com's definition of “under,” I see “Beneath the assumed surface or guise of: traveled under a false name.” So maybe we are meant to mask our love with an appeal to will. It could also be “In the process of” indicating that we are not to separate the act of love from the act of will.\\
\\
When reading AL, it's helpful to explore multiple meanings of even the most unassuming words.\\
\\if “Every man and every woman is a star.” it could also mean to invoke Nuit in the guise of the human beings all around us.\\
\\
A good point that flows directly out of the first 13 verses of Ch. 1. I would identify the soul with the star, that is the star is the undying spark at the center of being–similar to beliefs given in the Upanishads.\\
\\
“under” can also mean “subject to the restraint/constraint of.” So, perhaps we have to experience Nuit through our “star.” We experience the fullness of Nuit by looking deep inside of our own souls and finding that she is an everlasting part of us as we are an everlasting part of her.\\
\\

Re: Love Under Will: Practice and Theory\\
by <Mordecai> on Monday August 06, @03:25PM

>“under” can also mean “subject to the restraint/constraint of.” So, perhaps we have\\
>to experience Nuit through our “star.” We experience the fullness of Nuit\\
>by looking deep inside of our own souls and finding that she is an everlasting\\
>part of us as we are an everlasting part of her.\\
\\
A perfect illustration of your point that exploring the multiuple meanings of words can help illuminate the text. The question then becomes, “Are any meanings ruled out?”. That's where context becomes such an important factor in interpretation.\\
\\

Re: Love Under Will: Practice and Theory\\
by <Will> on Monday August 06, @07:43PM

The question then becomes, “Are any meanings ruled out?”. That's where context becomes such an important factor in interpretation.\\
\\
Correct. The funny thing is that to establish the proper context for a single verse, one has to already possess an understanding of the book as a whole. The idea is to slowly update your understanding through successive analyses of the text.\\
\\

Re: Love Under Will: Practice and Theory\\
by Colin S McLeod on Wednesday August 08, @10:31PM

“The idea is to slowly update your understanding through successive analyses of the text.”\\
\\
What? You mean study?\\
\\

Re: Love Under Will: Practice and Theory\\
by Fra THA;M on Thursday August 09, @10:24AM\\

“What? You mean study?”\\
\\
Unclean, Unclean!\\

Re: Love Under Will: Practice and Theory\\
by <Will> on Thursday August 09, @10:37AM\\

Personal appeal to the writings of the prophet, not group discussion. ;-p\\

Re: Love Under Will: Practice and Theory\\
by Fra THA;M on Thursday August 09, @11:09AM

Thelemites often say that study of AL is tantamount to sin. But I love sinning, and enjoy scrutinizing, criticizing and studying the minutia of that sweet book.\\
\\

Re: Love Under Will: Practice and Theory\\
by Colin S McLeod on Wednesday August 15, @01:32AM\\

Reductum ad absurdum.\\

Re: Love Under Will: Practice and Theory\\
by <Parlertriks> on Wednesday August 15, @09:08AM\\

rectum ad nauseum\\

Re: Love Under Will: Practice and Theory\\
by Frater THA;M on Wednesday August 15, @10:59AM\\

“Venus rules the sign of the Balance; and that is to show the formula: “Love is the law, love under will.”

“The woman is satisfied. From the cloak of the vivid wantoness of her dancing wings issue her hands; they hold the hilt of the Phallic sword of the magician. She holds the blade between her thighs.

This is again a heiroglyph of “Love is the law, love under will.” Every form of energy must be directed, must be applied with integrity, to the full satisfaction of its destiny.”

a couple quotes to muse

Book 4, part 3: MITP pg 182 (on Equilibrium):

“Will itself must be ready to culminate in the surrender of that will.”

Book 4, part 3 (of certain words):

“93 is the number of the word of the Law- Thelema- Will, and of Agape- Love, which indicates the nature of Will.”

Liber Al 1:29-30

“For I am divided for love's sake, for the chance of union.

This is the creation of the world, that the pain of division is as nothing, and the joy of dissolution all.”

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.

“As St. Paul says, 'Without shedding of blood there is no remission,' and who are we to argue with St. Paul?” – Aleister Crowley
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Comments are owned by the Poster.
[ home | search ]